RHAMNACEAE. — RHAMNUS 245 



description I can find no sufficient difference. Of the two other species I have had 

 the type specimens before me. The leaves of Hance^s specimen (Herb. Hance, 

 No. 14113), which unfortunately is not a very good one, have a rather truncate 

 apex with a short suddenly produced acumen. The same shape I find in Faurie's 

 No. 513 (July 1906) from Korea, which in every respect resembles the type of R. 

 oreigenes. But some of the leaves of No. 513 with a more prominent acumen are 

 much like the leaves of R. pseudofrangula L^veille, the type of which was collected 

 in Kweichou ("environs de Kong- Yang, mont du college, le long de Taqueduc; 

 Ye Mou, Yang-tse, 10 juin 1897 ") by Em. Bodinier (No. 1620). These flowering 

 branches with rather young leaves seem to me insufficient to make it possible to 

 decide, if Ldvcill^'s species may be identical with R. oreigenes or represent a variety 

 of it or even a good species. Without having seen better and more copious material 

 of both species and without having been able to compare all these forms with those 

 of R. crenattcs in every detail I cannot form an opinion of this group of forms. 

 Because L6veill6 has given a very short and bad description, comparing it only 

 with R. Frangula Linnaeus, which widely differs, a new description of the type 

 specimen of R. pseudofrangula may be added here: 



Frutex magnus; ramuli initio ferrugineo-hirsuti, annotini pauUo glabrescentes, 

 in sicco fuscescentes, vetustiores cinerascentes, subglabri, lenticellis numerosis 

 sed pauUo visibilibus obtecti; gemmae nudae, hirsutae. Folia altema, juvenilia 

 crasse membranacea, obovato-elliptica, basi obtusa v. subrotunda, apice obtusa 

 sed subito in acumen distinctum 2-5 mm. longum producta, margine crenulato- 

 serrata dentibus satis angustis callosis, supra ad nervos pilosa, subtus praesertim 

 nervis utrinque 7-9 prominentibus, distinctius pubescentia v. hirsuta, 3-5 cm. 

 longa, 1.5-2.5 cm. lata; petioli ad 6 mm. longi, hirsuti. Inflorescentia axillaris, 

 in apice pedunculi nudi hirsuti 1-10 mm. longi cymosa, fasciculis 6-10-floris; pedi- 

 celli 2-3 mm. longi, pilosi; flores 5-meri, hermaphroditi, ab illis R, crenatae vix 

 divcrsi, extus pilosi; sepala late-triangularia, receptaculis vix v. pauUo longiora; 

 petala sepalis fere duplo breviora, late obovalia, apice satis emarginata, basi breve 

 unguiculata, staminibus sublongiora; fructus non visus. 



3. Rhamnus heterophyllus Oliver. See also p. 232. 



This species may be most closely related to R. procumhens Edgeworth in Trans. 

 Linn. Soc. XX. 43 (1846). — Lawson in Hooker, Fl BriL Ind. I. 640 (1875), of 

 which I have failed to see a specimen. The author clearly says: stipulae persis- 

 tentes . , ., and the whole description agrees with the specimens of R. heterophyllus 

 which I have had before me. R. procumhens inhabits the northwestern Himalaya. 



4. Rhamnus EsquirolH L^veill^. See p. 233. 



5. Rhamnus paniculifLorus Schneider. See p. 233. 



6. Rhamnus tonkinensis Pitard in Lecomte, Fl. GSn. Indo-Chine, 928, fig. 117 

 (4) (1912). 



Tonkin. 



According to the description this species may be closely related to R. panicuU- 

 florus by its inflorescence, of which the author says: " fleurs groupies par fasci- 

 cules de 2-8, sur des axes feuilles tres allonges et ramifies, atteignant 10-25 cm." 

 It seems to differ from our new species by its not distinctly verrucose branchlets, 

 its more obtuse leaves and its not apiculated anthers. 



7. Rhamnus nipalensis Wallich apud Lawson in Hooker f., Fl. Brit. Ind. I. 

 640 (1875). 



Ceanothus napalensis Wallich in Roxburgh, Fl. Ind. II. 375 (1824). 



